This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Country Report for the United States
Annual Report to the IFLA CLM committee
This report is a short account of copyright and other legal developments relevant to libraries and archives in the United States for the period August 1, 2013-July 24, 2014.
Free Market Royalty Act. On September 30, 2013 the Free Market Royalty Act (HR 3219) was introduced in the House of Representatives. It would provide a public performance right for all audio transmissions of sound recordings, thereby extending such right to require terrestrial AM/FM broadcast radio stations to pay royalties for non-digital audio transmissions. Currently, a performance right for sound recordings is provided only with respect to digital transmissions by cable, satellite, and Internet radio stations. It would require digital services and terrestrial radio broadcasters to negotiate with copyright owners and artists through a market administered by Sound Exchange, rather than paying a rate set by the government.
Songwriter Equity Act of 2014. On February 25, 2014 the Songwriter Equity Act of 2014 (H.R. 4079) was introduced in the House of Representatives to ensure that songwriters, composers, and publishers are appropriately compensated for the use of their intellectual property, by providing fairness in the establishment of certain rates and fees under Sections 114 and 115 of the Copyright Act, and for other purposes. The act would allow a rate court under Section 114 to consider all relevant evidence when determining songwriter compensation, an ability that is currently prohibited by law. It would replace the current substandard rate for mechanical licenses used by the Copyright Royalty Board to determine mechanical royalties with a rate that reflects free market conditions.
American Royalties Too Act of 2014. On February 26, 2014 the American Royalties Too Act of 2014 (H. R. 4103) (the ART Act) was introduced in the House of Representatives to provide a resale royalty right (droit de suite) for the benefit of visual artists. It would provide a competitive resale royalty of five percent of the sales price, up to $35,000, for any work of visual art sold at auction for $5,000 or more and would allow U.S. artists to collect resale royalties when their works are sold at auction in the E.U. and more than 70 other countries. The ART Act includes many recommendations from the United States Copyright Office’s December 2013 report, entitled “Resale Royalties: An Updated Analysis.”
Respecting Senior Performers as Essential Cultural Treasures Act. On May 29, 2014, the Respecting Senior Performers as Essential Cultural Treasures Act (The RESPECT Act) (H.R.4772) was introduced in the House of Representatives. It would require digital music services that transmit sound recordings under the statutory license provided under federal copyright law to pay royalties for sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972 in the same manner as they pay royalties for sound recordings protected by federal copyright that are fixed after such date. Currently, sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972, are governed by state laws and are not subject to federal copyright laws that require music services to pay a performance royalty for transmitting such recordings.
Pending legislative issues
U.S. copyright reform
The United States is undertaking a comprehensive review of copyright law, headed by three separate government agencies conducting separate reviews: the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet; the Department of Commerce Internet Policy Task Force; and the U.S. Copyright Office. The following is a summary of activity to date.
House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet
April 24, 2013. The House of Representatives Judiciary Committee announced that it would conduct a comprehensive review of U.S. copyright law with the goal of updating of copyright law to accommodate new technologies. The Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet has thus far conducted hearings on the following issues, using expert witness testimony:
May 16, 2013. A Case Study for Consensus Building: The Copyright Principles Project. The Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet held its first hearing on comprehensive copyright review. Chairman Bob Goodlatte stated that the goal of this and future hearings would be to determine whether copyright law is still working in the digital age to reward creativity and innovation and “to demonstrate how interested parties can come together to discuss copyright issues in a productive way,” http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2013/5/a-case-study-for-consensus-building-the-copyright-principles-project-0
July 25, 2013. Hearing on Innovation in America: The Role of Copyrights. For the purpose of identifying concerns of rights holders,
On July 24, 2013, Jonathan Band, on behalf of the Library Copyright Alliance (LCA), submitted a statement on the role of copyright in innovation in connection with the hearing, http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/submissions/domestic/copyright-review.shtml.
August 1, 2013. Hearing on Innovation in America: The Role of Technology. For the purpose of identifying concerns of technology groups, http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2013/8/innovation-in-america-the-role-of-technology-0.
September 18, 2013. Hearing on The Role of Voluntary Agreements in the U.S. Intellectual Property System. http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2013/9/the-role-of-voluntary-agreements-in-the-u-s-intellectual-property-system.
January 14, 2014. Hearing on The Scope of Copyright Protection. The hearing focused on the broadcast right, the making available right, state laws, and standards, http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2014/1/the-scope-of-copyright-protection. In advance of the hearing, LCA submitted a statement explaining its concerns about the impact of the adoption of a making available right on the statute of limitations in copyright cases,
January 28, 2014. Hearing on The Scope of Fair Use. http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2014/1/the-scope-of-fair-use. On January 28, 2014, LCA submitted a statement describing how all types of libraries rely on fair use in order to serve their users and meet their missions, how the federal government relies on fair use in the patent examination process, and how rights holders rely on fair use in the development of new works, http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/submissions/domestic/copyright-review.shtml.
March 13, 2014 . Hearing on Section 512 of Title 17. http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2014/3/section-512-of-title-17. On March 12, 2014, LCA submitted a statement on the importance to libraries of the safe harbors provided by Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. LCA supports no changes to the existing law, holding that this provision helps libraries provide online services in good faith without liability for the potentially illegal actions of a third party, http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/submissions/domestic/copyright-review.shtml.
April 2, 2014. Hearing on Preservation and Reuse of Copyrighted Works.
http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2014/4/hearing-preservation-and-reuse-of-copyrighted-works. James G. Neal, Vice President for Information Services and University Librarian, Columbia University, testified at the hearing from the perspective of libraries. Neal highlighted that Section 108 (reproduction by libraries and archives) supplements Section 107 (fair use); the diminished need for orphan works legislation; and recent court decisions such as Authors Guild v. HathiTrust that confirmed that the creation of an online index by library mass digitization was a transformative fair use. LCA endorsed his testimony as well as his supplemental testimony, http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/bm~doc/testimony-jim-neal-2apr2014.pdf and http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/bm~doc/testimony-supplement-with-code.pdf.
May 8, 2014. Hearing on Compulsory Video Licenses of Title 17.
June 2, 2014. Hearing on First Sale under Title 17.
http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2014/6/hearing-first-sale-under-title-17. Greg Cram, Associate Director, Copyright and Information Policy, New York Public Library testified at the field hearing held in New York. He asked the Subcommittee to monitor licensing practices by publishers for e-book content to ensure that fundamental library services like first sale are not unduly restricted. LCA endorsed his testimony, http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/bm~doc/cram-nypl-first-sale-testimony-2june2014.pdf.
June 10, 2014. Hearing on Music Licensing Under Title 17, Part One.
June 25, 2014. Hearing on Music Licensing Under Title 17, Part Two.
July 15, 2014. Hearing on Moral Rights, Termination Rights, Resale Royalty, and Copyright Term.
http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2014/7/hearing-moral-rights-termination-rights-resale-royalty-and-copyright-term. On July 14, 2014, LCA submitted a statement opposing the extension of the current copyright term and expressing concerns regarding the present copyright term and its effects on the public domain, http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/submissions/domestic/copyright-review.shtml.
July 24, 2014. Hearing on Remedies.
http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2014/7/hearing-copyright-remedies. On July 23, 2014, LCA submitted a statement arguing that the existing limitation on statutory damages against libraries and archives is inadequate and calling for the safe harbor to be updated to reflect the digital area, http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/submissions/domestic/copyright-review.shtml.
U.S Department of Commerce, Internet Policy Task Force
Green Paper on Copyright Policy, Creativity, and Innovation in the Digital Economy. On Wednesday, July 31, 2013 the U.S. Department of Commerce released a green paper on Copyright Policy, Creativity, and Innovation in the Digital Economy (Green Paper) to advance discussion on a set of policy issues critical to economic growth. The Green Paper discusses the goals of maintaining an appropriate balance between rights and exceptions as the law continues to be updated; ensuring that copyright can be meaningfully enforced on the Internet; and furthering the development of an efficient online marketplace.
The Green Paper is considered to be the most thorough and comprehensive analysis of digital copyright policy issued by any administration since 1995. It is a product of the Department of Commerce’s Internet Policy Task Force (IPTF), with input from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA).
The Green Paper proposes establishing a multistakeholder dialogue on improving the operation of the notice and takedown system under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and soliciting public comment and convening roundtables on:
• The legal framework for the creation of remixes;
• The relevance and scope of the first sale doctrine in the digital environment;
• The application of statutory damages in the context of individual file-sharers and secondary liability for large-scale online infringement;
• The appropriate role for the government, if any, to help improve the online licensing environment, including access to comprehensive public and private databases of rights information.
Through the IPTF, the USPTO and NTIA will solicit further public comments and convene roundtables and forums on a number of key policy issues, http://www.uspto.gov/ip/global/copyrights/.
December 12, 2013. Department of Commerce Public Meeting: Copyright Policy, Creativity, and Innovation in the Digital Economy. This was the first public meeting on the Green Paper.
LCA issued a response to the Green Paper on November 13, 2013, commenting on issues relating to statutory damages, online licensing, collective rights organizations, and contractual restrictions on copyright exceptions, http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/submissions/domestic/copyright-review.shtml.
On January 8, 2014, LCA submitted additional comments focusing on four issues: the recent fair use court decision in the case Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens, digital preservation, remixes, and collective rights organizations, http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/submissions/domestic/copyright-review.shtml.
Roundtable Discussions on Remixes, First Sale, and Statutory Damages began on May 21, 2014 in Nashville, followed by roundtables on June 25, 2014 in Cambridge, July 29, 2014 in Los Angeles, and July 30, 2014 in Berkeley.
Multistakeholder Forum on the DMCA Notice and Takedown System. The IPTF established a forum for consensus-building among stakeholders with the aim of producing an agreed outcome for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the takedown system by the end of 2014. The initial public meeting was held on March 20, 2014 in Alexandria, Virginia, the second public meeting on May 8, 2014 in Berkeley, and the third public on June 20, 2014 in Alexandria, VA.
United States Copyright Office
Copyright Small Claims. On September 30, 2013, the U.S. Copyright Office released the findings of its two-year study on copyright small claims. The report documents the significant costs and other challenges of addressing copyright claims that have a relatively low economic value in the current federal system, and recommends the establishment of an alternative voluntary system of adjudication to be housed within the Copyright Office, which would administer proceedings through online and teleconferencing facilities. Its focus would be on small infringement cases valued at no more than $30,000 in damages. Along with written comments submitted on this issue and transcripts of public roundtables held in November 2012, the report is available at http://www.copyright.gov/docs/smallclaims/ .
Orphan Works and Mass Digitization. The Copyright Office requested comments and held public roundtables on orphan works and mass digitization in Washington, DC on March 10-11, 2014. Initial comments, reply comments, and additional comments and transcripts of the roundtables are available at http://www.copyright.gov/orphan/. LCA and a number of individual libraries submitted comments.
Music Licensing Study. The U.S. Copyright Office is undertaking a study to evaluate the effectiveness of the existing methods of licensing music. The Office will use the information gathered during the study to report to Congress. Public roundtables were held in Nashville on June 4-5, 2014, in Los Angeles on June 16-17, 2014, and in New York on June 23-24, 2014. Written comments have been posted to the website and transcripts of the roundtables will be posted to the site at http://www.copyright.gov/docs/musiclicensingstudy/.
Study on the Rights of Making Available. The U.S. Copyright Office is undertaking a study to assess the state of U.S. law recognizing and protecting “making available” and “communication to the public” rights for copyright holders. Written comments and additional comments were solicited and a public roundtable was held on May 5, 2014 in Washington, DC. A transcript of the roundtable discussion and the written comments, including those of LCA, are available at http://www.copyright.gov/docs/making_available/.
New and proposed legislation
Public Access to Public Science Act. On September 19, 2013, the Public Access to Public Science (PAPS) Act was introduced in the House of Representatives (H.R. 3157) to build on the recently issued White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) Directive on Public Access and to codify that language into legislation for agencies under the jurisdiction of the House Science Committee. Those agencies include the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the National Weather Service (NWS). A 12-month embargo period would balance publishers' needs with public access goals.
Previously, on February 14, 2013, the Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act of 2013 (FASTR) was introduced in both the House of Representatives (H.R. 708) and the Senate (S. 350). It would require each federal agency with extramural research expenditures of over $100 million to develop a federal research public access policy, following common procedures for the collection and depositing of research papers, that is consistent with, and that advances, the purposes of the agency. Both bills would advance public access to research. SPARC issued talking points on the issue of PAPS v FASTR, http://www.sparc.arl.org/resource/talking-points.
Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments of 2014. On January 14, the U.S. House of Representations approved the Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments of 2014 (H.R. 1233) that updates selected provisions of the Presidential Records Act and the Federal Records Act. For example, the bill imposes a time limit during which a former president must assert any claim of privilege to a record once the Archivist of the United States has decided to make that record available to the public. The amendments also call for a process to manage the release of records when such a claim of privilege is made. ARL joined with more than 20 groups in a letter in support of the legislation, http://www.openthegovernment.org/sites/default/files/HR%201233%20Pres%20and%20Federal%20Records%20Act.pdf.
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014. On January 15-16, 2014, Congress passed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 (H.R. 3547) that contains a section promoting public access to federally funded research and it was signed by President Obama. The bill requires federal agencies under the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education with research budgets of $100 million or more to develop a federal research public access policy that provides for online access to articles resulting from federally funded research within 12 months of publication in a peer-reviewed journal, in compliance with all relevant copyright laws, https://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/3547.
Frontiers in Innovation, Research, Science and Technology Act of 2013. On March 20, 2014 the Frontiers in Innovation, Research, Science and Technology Act of 2013 (FIRST) Act was introduced in the House of Representatives (H.R. 4186). The bill reauthorizes and streamlines federal investments at the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) by funding research. It also sets priorities for taxpayer-funded research and investments in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education programs.
Library associations objected to language in Section 302 of the bill that they asserted would restrict federal agencies’ ability to provide timely, equitable online access to articles and data and undercut the the widely-supported White House OSTP Directive on Public Access to the Results of Federally Funded Research. Eleven organizations expressed opposition to this language in a letter to Congress, http://sparc.arl.org/sites/default/files/OAWG%20FIRST%20Letter_0.pdf.
Affordable College Textbook Act. Twins bills entitled the “Affordable College Textbook Act” were introduced in the Senate on November 14, 2013 (S. 1704) and in the House (H.R. 3538) on November 19, 2013. They would expand the use of open textbooks on college campuses, providing affordable alternatives to traditional textbooks and lowering prices. The bills direct the Secretary of Education to fund the creation of college textbooks and materials to be made available under open licenses and to create a grant program to support pilot programs at colleges and universities to create and expand the use of open textbooks with priority for those programs that will achieve the highest savings for students. See http://www.sparc.arl.org/advocacy/national/act.
Technology, Equality, and Accessibility in College and Higher Education Act. On November 15, 2013 the Technology, Equality, and Accessibility in College and Higher Education (Teach) Act was introduced in the House of Representatives (H.R.3505), to ensure that disabled students are given equal treatment as technology plays a larger and larger role in instruction. It would require colleges either to make instructional technology accessible to disabled students or to provide them with equivalent, alternative resources. The legislation also calls on the government to develop guidelines for electronic instructional materials used in higher education.
Electronic Books Opening Opportunity for Knowledge Act. The Electronic Books Opening Opportunity for Knowledge (E-BOOK) Act was introduced in the House of Representatives on March 14, 2014 (H.R. 4259) to promote the pilot program proposed in the Affordable College Textbook Act. It would establish up to 10 pilot programs at public institutions throughout the country to increase access to digital course materials, expand the availability of e-readers and tablets for low-income students, and encourage professors to incorporate new learning technologies into their classes.
Online Competition and Consumer Choice Act of 2014. On June 17, 2014 the Online Competition and Consumer Choice Act of 2014 was introduced in the Senate (S. 2476) and the House of Representatives (H.R. 4880). The net neutrality bill would prohibit Internet service providers from giving preferential treatment to the traffic of online content, applications, services, or devices. The bill challenges the decision in Verizon Communications Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission (2014) and is strongly supported by library associations (see p. 8-9).
Email Privacy Act. The Email Privacy Act was originally introduced in the House of Representatives (H.R. 1852) on May 7, 2013, in an effort to update an outdated law known as the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) and to ensure that Fourth Amendment privacy protections extend to online communications. ECPA, a law from 1986, permits government agencies to access electronic communications older than 180 days and stored online without a warrant, affording online communications less protection than hard copy documents stored in a filing cabinet. The Email Privacy Act would require a warrant for content, providing online documents and communications, such as those stored in the cloud, with the same Fourth Amendment protections that are currently afforded to hard copies. The Email Privacy Act hit a milestone on June 17, 2014 when it reached 218 cosponsors, representing a majority of the House of Representatives.
USA FREEDOM Act. On October 29, 2013 the Uniting and Strengthening America by Fulfilling Rights and Ending Eavesdropping, Dragnet-Collection and Online Monitoring Act (USA FREEDOM Act) was introduced in the House of Representatives (H.R. 3361) and in the Senate (S. 1599). It would update a number of provisions contained in the USA PATRIOT Act, including Section 215, known as the “business records” or “library records” provision. The USA FREEDOM Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives after significant amendments to the bill were made. The original version of the bill still exists in the Senate.
Illinois. On August 9, 2013, Governor Pat Quinn of Illinois signed into law the Open Access to Research Articles Act (Public Act 098-0295). The bill requires each Illinois public university to create an open access task force with the goal of making its research available to the public online and free of charge.
Tennessee. A was introduced in the Senate (SB 2187) on January 27, 2014 and in the House of Representatives (HB 2187) on January 29, 2014, known as the “Legacy Sound Recording Protection Act.” It would prohibit any person or legal entity, besides the owner of a copyrighted sound recording initially fixed on or before February 15, 1972, from reproducing, distributing, performing, or otherwise using the recording without the owner’s express permission and would create a cause of action for the owner. It would amend TCA Title 29, Title 39, and Title 40.
New Jersey. On March 24, 2014 New Jersey introduced a bill entitled the Affordable College Textbook Act (No. 2809) related to the development of open textbooks. It would require institutions of higher education to develop open textbooks available to students at no charge and would require buyback of used textbooks at 50 percent of purchase price. The bill can seen as an effort to position New Jersey as a recipient for funds that might be available if the federal E-BOOK Act is passed, http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2014/Bills/A3000/2809_I1.PDF .
Connecticut. On June 3, 2014, Governor Dannel P. Malloy signed An Act Concerning a State-wide Platform for the Distribution of Electronic Books (P.A. 14-82), a law authorizing the State Library to create and maintain a state platform for the distribution of e-books to public library patrons.
Ohio. On March 25, 2014, the Ohio Senate passed Senate Concurrent Resolution 22 which urges the U.S. Congress to bring libraries, publishers, and other interested parties together to find a cost-effective solution to providing increasingly popular e-books.
Authors Guild v. HathiTrust. On June 10, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued its ruling, largely affirming the lower court decision of October 10, 2012 in favor of the HathiTrust Digital Library. The case concerns the digitization of copyrighted works in the Google Print Library Project that commenced in 2004. The appeals court held that the activity of the HathiTrust in creating a full-text search database and providing access to the print disabled constitutes fair use and is protected under the Copyright Act. However, the Second Circuit declined to rule on the issue of the HathiTrust’s preservation activities, questioning whether the plaintiffs had standing to bring this claim, and remanded to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. At the time of writing this report, it is unclear whether the Authors Guild will appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. LCA filed amicus briefs in support of HathiTrust in both the district court and the Second Circuit.
On July 7, 2014, Jonathan Band, legal counsel to LCA, released an analysis entitled “What Does the HathiTrust Decision Mean for Libraries?” The paper reviews several issues including mass digitization and storage, access to works, suggestions concerning other forms of access, and associational standing, http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/bm~doc/article-hathitrust-analysis-7jul2014.pdf.
Authors Guild v. Google. On November 14, 2013, Judge Denny Chin dismissed the Authors Guild’s eight-year-old lawsuit against Google over, ruling that Google’s scanning of more than 20 million books and making “snippets” of text available online constituted fair use, https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/834877-google-books-ruling-on-fair-use.html.
On Friday, April 11, 2014 the Authors Guild filed an appeal in the case. In a statement accompanying the announcement, the Authors Guild accused Google of a purely commercial motivation in scanning titles and making them searchable through Google Books and of putting authors’ works and livelihoods at risk.
On July 8, 2014, the Library Copyright Association filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, http://www.arl.org/focus-areas/copyright-ip/fair-use/code-of-best-practices/3307#.U8YVIrAg_VI.
Cambridge University Press et al. v. Georgia State University. Oral arguments were held on November 19, 2013 in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. A ruling on the appeal is pending. The case, initiated in April 2008 by Cambridge University Press, Oxford University Press, and SAGE Publishers, concerns Georgia State’s electronic reserves system. The decision issued on May 11, 2012 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia found 5 infringements out of 74 claims and overwhelmingly favored GSU. It is the first U.S. federal court decision specifically addressing fair use and electronic reserves. The publishers appealed on many points of the ruling. LCA filed an amicus brief in support of Georgia State.
American Broadcasting Cos., Inc. v. Aereo, Inc. On June 25, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision against Aereo, Inc., holding that Aereo infringes the right of public performance by providing a service to subscribers that allows them to watch television programs over the Internet by means of a transmission dedicated to each customer through the use of a small micro antenna, using original broadcasts.
Garcia v. Google. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in a 2-1 decision that Cindy Lee Garcia, an actor in the film Innocence of Muslims, held a copyright interest in her performance after being tricked into appearing a five-second clip of a film. She subsequently sought takedown of the film from YouTube. The case raises concerns for the traditional contours of copyright and online free speech LCA joined an amici brief in Garcia v. Google authored by the Electronic Frontier Foundation urging the Ninth Circuit to reconsider its decision en banc so that the full court may consider these issues, http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/bm~doc/lca-amicus-garcia-v-google-17apr14.pdf.
Verizon Communications Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission (2014). On January 14, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia overturned the anti-discrimination and anti-blocking rules of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) Open Internet Order 2010, a regulation governing network neutrality. The case is viewed as a loss for network neutrality supporters and a victory for the cable broadband industry. The ruling could result in prioritized delivery by Internet service providers to those willing to pay to promote their content, advancing commercial interests over research library and higher education interests.
On February 13, 2014, in a letter to the Chairman and the Commissioners of the FCC, ARL, ALA, and EDUCAUSE expressed disappointment with the decision. At the same time, the associations noted that the court’s recognition of the FCC’s legal authority under Section 706 to protect consumers and the public’s access to Internet services was a positive outcome, http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/ltr-ala-arl-educause-to-fcc-re-net-neutrality-13feb2014.pdf.
The Library Copyright Alliance (LCA), a coalition of three major library associations— the American Library Association (ALA), the Association of Research Libraries (ARL), and the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL)— advocates on behalf of U.S. libraries on major national and international copyright issues affecting libraries and educational institutions.
Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired, or Otherwise Print Disabled. The U.S. signed the treaty on October 2, 2013. The Library Copyright Alliance (LCA) worked with the U.S. government in the course of negotiations on the Marrakesh Treaty that was adopted by member states of the World Intellectual Property Organization on June 27, 2013, by contributing comments to successive drafts of the treaty. On August 6, 2013, Jonathan Band issued “A User Guide to the Marrakesh Treaty,” http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/bm~doc/user-guide-marrakesh-treaty-060813.pdf.
Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP). On December 6, 2013, ARL joined 28 other organizations and 71 individuals in a letter to TPP negotiators opposing a copyright term of life plus 70 years, http://www.arl.org/news/arl-news/3066-copyright-term-extension-in-trans-pacific-partnership-agreement-opposed-by-29-organizations-and-71-individuals#.U8tTx7Ag_mQ.
On July 9, 2014, ARL joined 34 other organizations in again sending a letter to ministers of the TPP negotiating parties, expressing opposition to the copyright term of life plus 70 years proposed by the United States. The organizations-- representing libraries, archives, authors, educators, students, digital rights advocacy groups, and technological innovators—note that this extended copyright term threatens the public domain, http://www.arl.org/news/arl-news/3314-coalition-opposes-copyright-term-extension-in-trans-pacific-partnership-agreement#.U8tUNLAg_mQ.
Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). Negotiations between the United States and the European Union for a trade agreement began in July 2013. There have been six negotiating rounds and one chapter will focus on intellectual property. ARL presented at the stakeholder day at the fifth round of negotiations on May 21, 2014 on the topic of copyright limitations and exceptions, http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/copyright-limitations-and-exceptions-ttip-negotiations-by-krista-cox-21may2014.pdf.
European Union Copyright Review. On March 3, 2014, LCA submitted a response to the European Union consultation on the review of copyright rules. The EU website provided a list of 80 questions for stakeholders to answer. The LCA response focused on questions most relevant to the library community, including digital transmissions, term of protection, limitations and exceptions, preservation and archiving, e-lending, mass digitization, teaching, research, and access for persons with disabilities, http://www.arl.org/component/taxonomy/term/summary/62/44#.U8YEPLAg_VI.
Following the January 2014 decision in Verizon v. FCC, the FCC again proposed network neutrality rules to ensure an open Internet. The FCC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued on May 15, 2014 proposes rules that are subject to public comment, with deadlines on July 15, 2014 and September 10, 2014, http://www.fcc.gov/document/protecting-and-promoting-open-internet-nprm.
On July 10, 2014, ARL along with 10 other higher education and library organizations released a joint set of Net Neutrality Principles they recommend as the basis of the FCC decision to protect the openness of the Internet. The groups believe network neutrality protections are essential to protecting freedom of speech, educational achievement, and economic growth, http://www.arl.org/publications-resources/publications-ordering-information/3313-net-neutrality-principles.
On July 18, 2014, a coalition of 11 higher education and library organizations, including ARL, filed comments with the FCC on net neutrality. The comments expand on points made in the Net Neutrality Principles jointly filed by library and higher education groups on July 10, to strengthen the proposals made in the FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, http://www.arl.org/news/arl-news/3328-library-higher-education-organizations-file-net-neutrality-comments-with-fcc#.U8mANhBCw7Y.
Prepared by Janice T. Pilch
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Tomas D. Lipinski,
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
August 1, 2014